Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

Nehalem 8-Core Hackintosh?

Rick Darge

Rick Darge

Banned
Joined
Dec 29, 2006
Messages
3,775
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
44
Are the dual socket PC Nehalem's available yet? And if so, has anyone attempted to build a hackintosh? The current crop of 8-cores are $3300. Wondering if its worth the push or if I should go the pirate route? :sifone::driving:
 
  • Thread starter
  • Banned
  • #3
I've been researching. The cost to build a machine similar to a new Mac Pro is so close, it's not even worth it. I'm going into debt! What recession?
 
Not yet that I know of. I've been looking. There is an ASUS board... a promise of a board... that might even let us OC. If that happens the cost will be close to 50% not counting RAM or HDDs, and a bit faster. I am sure once this thing is out it will be hard to miss.

What ever happened with the trial?
 
Apple is always having about two-three months exclusive use of processors from Intel before any other PC competition.
It is a CEO sort of deal between Steve Jobs (Apple) and Paul Otellini (Intel).
 
Gavin Greenwalt said:
It'll be ongoing for years I'm sure.
Click to expand...

Then till it is settled it is fair game, right? :confused1:

Sanjin Jukic said:
Apple is always having about two-three months exclusive use of processors from Intel before any other PC competition.
It is a CEO sort of deal between Steve Jobs (Apple) and Paul Otellini (Intel).
Click to expand...

Nice deal.
 
Installing OSX on non-Apple hardware does indeed violate the EULA... Software EULA's are considered legally binding contracts within the USA and Canada, I can't comment about terms and conditions elsewhere.

What does this mean??? Pretty much nothing. As long as the copy of the software is obtained legally (bought from a store or whatever), then there is no copyright violation or software piracy, etc... As long as there's no reverse-engineering or hacking or direct modification, then there's no IP infringement to speak of... So then it just becomes a violation of the terms of the EULA. So for small owners and individuals what recourse would there be? I suppose Apple could legally get a court injunction to force a company using hackintosh systems to cease all operations performed on those systems until the Apple software is removed and verified by an impartial third-party or something.

Look at the couple companies out there that sell hackintosh systems. Apple kinda fought them at first, and successfully shut down a couple of them. But the primary one out there (psystar) is still going and they have actually come to some sort of secretive agreement with Apple outside of the courts. ...For now. Personally, I think Apple is using them as a test-case for something.

IMO, I think Apple will eventually open up OSX to be installed on general PCs and Apple will still continue to make their own systems for as long as it makes sense. If the next version of Windows blows as bad as Vista, then Apple could probably swoop in and take over the desktop OS market. I really think they could do it. I'm not sure I'd want them to do it though. But I would like to see OSX be more open to installation on other hardware.
 
One reason apple is so pissy is because they only sell upgrades.

If you buy an apple computer you get OSX. If you purchase OSX in a store.... they assume you SOMEHOW already own OSX.

With windows it's a little different since they actually sell retail copies that could theoretically be installed on a computer without Windows already on it.

So... apple's pricing for OSX is for the upgrade copy not the full copy. For windows this is only about a $30 difference (OEM). But is often cited by Apple zealouts who claim that OSX is much cheaper... ignoring the fact that they're comparing the full copy of Windows to what could only be described as an upgrade for OSX.
 
I agree.

Furthermore in the UK EULAs are regarded as being pseudo-legal and will be difficult to have upheld by the judiciary (although Apple will surely put in the necessary effort if they want to). In Germany they are not worth a dime due to post-purchase contracts being illegal.

I'm really blown away by the things NVIDIA are doing. If Red were to use an Avid style division of power between graphics card and main processor then there is no reason we can't get all that power at a lower cost using multiple graphics processors.

Also what about the server edition of OSX. That's designed for installing on third party hardware. Right?
 
I guess someone has to point out that Mac's don't cost more just because Apple puts their components into a prettier box. Part of the premium you pay when buying a Mac is for the peace of mind that you're getting a closed system that just freaking works. The reason Macs are generally more stable than their retarded cousin the PC is this closed system. Apple doesn't have to worry about 10,000 different hardware configurations and how they will affect the stability and usability of their computers since they alone have control over the hardware and the software.
 
Stefan, I agree. Something tells me three GTX 275's would do a lot working along side two Nehalem Xeons at 4.0Ghz with 12GB of the best DDR3. All for about $3,500 by the end of the year minus the RAID and screens. Plus a dual boot to play Crysis maxed out at 1920 x 1200 and get 60 minimum fps of course. :)

It is all up to what software will do... always left waiting on them...

I would love to know if there is a definite answer as to whether Mac would only be able to get you to stop or it it is uncertain as to whether they could bill or sue you.
 
Ethan Cooper said:
I guess someone has to point out that Mac's don't cost more just because Apple puts their components into a prettier box. Part of the premium you pay when buying a Mac is for the peace of mind that you're getting a closed system that just freaking works. The reason Macs are generally more stable than their retarded cousin the PC is this closed system. Apple doesn't have to worry about 10,000 different hardware configurations and how they will affect the stability and usability of their computers since they alone have control over the hardware and the software.
Click to expand...

You pay premium because there is nothing out there pushing the price down.
 
Don't want to get into the standard Apple or OSX EULA debate as it has been discussed before. I believe that the Core i7 is supported on an Intel DX58SO and Gigabyte UD5 (and possibly other Gigabyte EX58 boards). Not sure if other boards are supported, but I believe you're out of luck on a dual-socket configuration right now. Granted, only server dual-sockets boards have been released thus far. You'd be far better served, if you're going dual-socket and looking to save money, to wait for Asus' enthusiast dual-socket board, the Z8NA-D6. I'm not sure if such boards will ultimately support OSX. Of course, you could always build a single-socket system, overclock, and certainly see great speed.

Or you could always keep checking Psystar.com (the company being sued by Apple) to see when / if they offer an Nehalem OSX system. Not sure about their warranty prospects though!

Here are a few resources to explore if you're interested in pursuing this. I'm ultimately not an expert on the hackintosh process, so please don't take any of my words as Gospel. Still, a single-socket Nehalem dual-boot hackintosh would have my attention right now if I were building a system and so inclined.

Pretty stable Gigabyte-based i7 Hackintosh:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/markdennison/3248991990/

InsanelyMac OSx86 Subforum:
http://www.insanelymac.com/forum/index.php?showforum=136

OSx86 Wiki
http://wiki.osx86project.org/wiki/index.php/Main_Page

Eric
 
Jeff Kilgroe said:
Installing OSX on non-Apple hardware does indeed violate the EULA... Software EULA's are considered legally binding contracts within the USA and Canada, I can't comment about terms and conditions elsewhere.

What does this mean??? Pretty much nothing. As long as the copy of the software is obtained legally (bought from a store or whatever), then there is no copyright violation or software piracy, etc... As long as there's no reverse-engineering or hacking or direct modification, then there's no IP infringement to speak of... So then it just becomes a violation of the terms of the EULA. So for small owners and individuals what recourse would there be? I suppose Apple could legally get a court injunction to force a company using hackintosh systems to cease all operations performed on those systems until the Apple software is removed and verified by an impartial third-party or something.

Look at the couple companies out there that sell hackintosh systems. Apple kinda fought them at first, and successfully shut down a couple of them. But the primary one out there (psystar) is still going and they have actually come to some sort of secretive agreement with Apple outside of the courts. ...For now. Personally, I think Apple is using them as a test-case for something.

IMO, I think Apple will eventually open up OSX to be installed on general PCs and Apple will still continue to make their own systems for as long as it makes sense. If the next version of Windows blows as bad as Vista, then Apple could probably swoop in and take over the desktop OS market. I really think they could do it. I'm not sure I'd want them to do it though. But I would like to see OSX be more open to installation on other hardware.
Click to expand...

Let us hope so...

I really wanna install OSX on my next PC.

I'm not an OSX hater (not sure how could anyone be) but Mac prices, specially in my country, are abusive.

If Apple has this rivalry history with MS, hell, just open OSX for everybody.

I bet lots of people will even get it legally (yeah, even those who never bought one original OS copy in my life).

:beer:
 
Roberto Lequeux said:
So if you were in breach of the EULA, Mac would have no way to fine or sue you? They would only be able to make you stop?
Click to expand...

Hard to say, a lot depends on how the courts interpret the situation at the time it falls before them. In all practicality, that's about all they could do -- have a court order you to stop. And first they have to find out about you and then they have to decide if it's worth-while to chase you and make you quit.

If Apple would just open up and sell full retail versions of OSX for the same price as Vista Ultimate (MSRP), I think the world would be a better place. However, one of Apple's biggest reasons against doing this is stability. Or at least this has been said by Jobs in the past. When they are no longer in control of the hardware OSX is allowed to run on, they are suddenly open to exponentially more compatibility and support issues. They essentially become another Microsoft trying to support a massive OS across an infinitely large array of hardware. But if they sell the OS and allow people to unofficially install it without support, it relieves Apple of responsibility and yet proliferates their software. Hmmm.... Maybe there is a reason they don't make it difficult to install OSX on third-party hardware.

Gavin is right about the pricing. All OSX copies sold are considered "upgrades". And part of the Apple price premium you pay on their systems does go to develop and support OSX.

Yes, Apple systems are expensive... But they are no more expensive than comparable PCs from vendors like Dell and HP. Go price out a top of the line dual Xeon workstation from these guys... Ouch. The problem with Apple's offerings is the lack of choice. There is nothing being offered between a 24" iMac and the Mac Pro. Where's the compact desktop quad-core box to fill the gap that many people are filling with a Hackintosh? You can't tell me that Apple couldn't sell a compact tower with a single quad-core CPU, 4 drive bays + optical bay and 4 PCI-e slots for $1299 and not make a killing. Many people out there need more than a mini or an iMac, but don't want or need the monster Mac Pro.

For those comparing Apple prices to assembling their own PC, that's not a proper comparison. Because the same logic applies to comparing their self-built box to HP, Dell, BOXX, etc.. I think most who complain about Apple pricing never compare to equivalent PC systems. They compare against the PC that fits their needs. And to me, this shows that Apple needs to a do a better job at listening to what the market wants.
 
I am not complaining about Apple's pricing, not anymore anyway, I already let that out. :) It is what it is, and I would be glad to buy an Apple at a premium.

The reason someone would build a dual boot though, IMO, would be if it gave you what you REALLY wanted and Apple wasn't offering it ATM. In my case that would be online RT grading at 2k from 4k (5k later)... not sure if I said that right. To be able to naively grade on a 1920 x 1080 10-it screen, in Color. I have no clue if my dreams will be satisfied by one computer this year... most likely not... it sounds like a tall order. But you never know. :cross fingers:

Still, I am going to base my purchase on a system's ability to do things naively and RT. The more the better. Otherwise I can cut ProRes 4:2:2 in my current computer till it happens. I am not in a rush. I agree that a dual boot single Nehalem is very nice right now, but that isn't enough power to say to me that now is the time to build, not when there are prospects of an enthusiast dual socket short term.

I forgot to add an other 12G of DDR3 to the price, not that big of a deal... still $4,000 at the end of the year including MoBo, CPUs, processor and chipset cooling, PSU and a case.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top